Cherie Hu Ethical Reasoning 20: Self, Serenity, and Vulnerability Essay 1

Confucianism: Groundedness as ncurable Human !la"

#Citations from $nalects are in brac%ets& 'boo%:section(

n The Religion of the Future, )nger argues that Confucianism, li%e other humanist a**roaches to e+istence, ma%es a conscious decision to turn a"ay from our incurable fla"s of mortality, insatiability, and groundlessness, and to construct instead an artificial, alternate reality that humans can control and build& nstead of confronting our groundlessness and stri,ing to accommodate our boundless natures, )nger claims, Confucianism fashions a -rigidified form of the self- not only to "hich "e must surrender in order to continue li,ing, but also "hich is inade.uate in accounting for the -element of transcendence- in our e+*erience as human beings& n this *a*er, "ill .uestion )nger/s inter*retation of Confucianism as both non0confrontational and inade.uate& "ill argue, in fact, that Confucianism *resents one of the most confrontational a**roaches to e+istence in terms of dealing "ith the reality of the human condition, and that it is the structure of human nature itself, rather than that of Confucianist *hiloso*hy, that is inade.uate& )nger di,ides the incurable human fla" of groundlessness into t"o categories: s*eculati,e and e+istential& S*eculati,e groundlessness is -the e+istence of intractable limits to our natural %no"ledge of the natural "orld,- "hile e+istential groundlessness is the dilemma that -"e *lay a *art 0 a tiny, marginal *art 0 in a story that "e did not, and "ould not, "rite&- )nger

then frames his criticism of Confucianism under the shado" of this dichotomy of groundlessness, claiming that, along "ith other humanist a**roaches to e+istence, Confucianism -acce*ts our s*eculati,e groundlessness but refuses to see it as im*lying our e+istential groundlessness&- n other "ords, Confucianism encourages us to turn a"ay from our e+istential meaninglessness by fabricating an artificial order that is meaningful only to our eyes& counter )nger/s argument by ta%ing a similar t"ofold a**roach, sho"ing that Confucianism neither *assi,ely acce*ts s*eculati,e groundlessness nor neglects e+istential groundlessness, but rather argues strongly that both conce*tions of groundlessness are entirely absent from human nature to begin "ith, and thus do not e+ist as *roblems "ith "hich humanity must co*e& 1a%ing )nger/s argument into account, Confucianism is far from acce*ting of s*eculati,e groundlessness& !or Confucius, there is no such thing as a -groundless- state of humanity, because the community into "hich humanity is born is innately ritual, habitual, and grounded& 1here are no -intractable limits- to our %no"ledge of the "orld, because "e already %no" all that there is to %no" 0 or, rather, all that there is to %no" is laid out right in front of us, and reaching this %no"ledge does not re.uire any transcendent 2ourney, but rather sim*ly being conscious of one/s o"n surroundings& 3ur only limit to full %no"ledge of the "orld is, therefore, a,oiding the mundane, concrete interactions in "hich "e engage from day to day in fa,or of more transcendental, more unreal *henomena 0 i&e& relin.uishing our currently grounded state in fa,or of s*eculati,e groundlessness& !ar from stri,ing to create an artificially ordered life, Confucianism encourages its disci*les to engage in direct confrontation "ith reality, "hich is in fact e+actly "hat )nger demands& 1his a,oidance of reality is the core *roblem that *lagues the citi4ens of modern society, according to both )nger and Confucius& Confucianism/s decision to begin "ith confronting the realities of humanity/s mundane

nature contrasts "ith other moral *hiloso*hies of the time, "hich chose to loo% directly to"ard a transcendent realm for guidance& Herbert !ingarette elaborates on this anti0confrontation, "riting that, in an attem*t to gras* the meaning of life, humanity tends to establish -a narrati,e of e,ents- in a -*arallel "orld &&& concurrent "ith the *resent but going on in a different realm,rather than de,elo* a conce*tion about its o"n "orld& n focusing on this *arallel "orld, ho"e,er, "e begin to lose a strong notion of our im*ortance in the non0transcendental "orld& Confucianism strongly .uestions our inclinations to de,elo* a connection "ith intangible bodies "ithout first learning to connect "ith our human comrades: -5ot yet being able to ser,e other *eo*le, ho" "ould you be able to ser,e the s*irits6 &&& 5ot yet understanding life, ho" could you understand death6- '11:12(& 1hus, contrary to )nger/s argument that Confucianism turns a"ay from reality to construct an alternati,e realm, Confucianism encourages its follo"ers to turn toward reality and to engage directly "ith it& )nger argues that the artificial, rigidified form of the self for "hich Confucianism creates in his *hiloso*hy "ould %ee* us from gaining insight into the "orld& *ro*ose, ho"e,er, that Confucius as%s for *recisely the in,erse of this 0 that "e are born, not coerced by Confucius, into this rigidified form of the self, "e did not choose to create such a self, and that, in becoming conscious of the different constituents of this rigidity and in using our adherence to ritual *ro*riety, "e gain insight into oursel,es by *racticing and *romoting "hat ma%es us truly human& )nger suggests that Confucianism -surrenders- to a rigidified form of the self, but one cannot acti,ely -surrender- *er se to that in "hich one has been naturally born& Surrender is ,oluntary defeat to a higher order of nature7 "hat Confucius as%s for, on the other hand, is serious contem*lation, scrutiny, and *ractice of the rituals in our o"n human nature into "hich "e ha,e been in,oluntarily *laced& 1hese rituals are of course inade.uate, but "e are nonetheless

born into them, and "e must "or% to sha*e and o,ercome them& 1here is therefore no ga* in %no"ledge, e+ce*t for that created by our o"n reluctance to engage "ith our *ersonal natures& 1hus, contrary to "hat )nger *ro*oses, "e cannot -create- a rigidified form of the self because "e are already rigidified by nature7 "e cannot e+tract or construct by hand something that is innate in us& Confucianism argues that *ure ritual is a "holly real, unchangeable, almost animalistic as*ect of nature 0 it e+ists in all li,ing organisms, in the form of instinct or of learned habit& 8hat then ma%es us human, according to Confucius, is our ability to recognize the *resence of this ritual& Ritual *erformance is not enough 0 -e,en dogs and horses- engage in it '2&9(& 1he %ey in the human ritual is consciousness of, recognition of, and res*ect for the recei,ing end: - f you do not res*ect your *arents,- Confucius as%s, -"hat is the differencebet"een you and another animal '2&9(6 Confucius sees ritual, then, not only as an innate characteristic of humanity, but also, if "e are conscious of it, as a ,aluable asset that can turn the *urely instinctual human being, the -barbarian,- into the most e+em*lary form of man& 1he Analects also re,eals that habit and ritual differentiate not only humans from animals, but also humans from each other: -Human beings are similar in their natural tendencies, but ,ary greatly by ,irtue of their habits- '19&2(& Rituals thus *ro,ide a sense both of collecti,ity and of indi,iduality to the human race, and must not be inter*reted as artificial or inade.uate& n conclusion, in ac%no"ledging our ritual nature, Confucianism minimi4es, if not eradicates com*letely, our s*eculati,e groundlessness& )nder the Holy Rite, "e become e.ui**ed "ith more %no"ledge than e,er before to tac%le the *roblems that reality *oses to the human race& :efore refuting the second side of )nger/s argument, state "hat see to be a danger of )nger/s notion of e+istential groundlessness& $ccording to )nger, because "e su**osedly *lay only a small role in our story, our true, unseen roots are dis2oint from our -secondary- roots ;i&e&

"hat "e *ercei,e our roots to be<, and real religious inno,ation and re,olution must confront our true roots and get rid of our secondary roots, the latter "ith "hich "e are clearly more comfortable& see )nger/s goal and method, ho"e,er, as contradictory here& )nger clearly see%s a more grounded society, but "hat he *ro*oses that "e do in *ursuit of that goal "ill actually increase our groundlessness& $ttac%ing our secondary roots "ill destroy the grounds on "hich "e ha,e li,ed our li,es, no matter ho" rooted in reality those secondary roots are, and, already being groundless, our li,es "ill only e+ist in a larger ,oid, unless "e can someho" come in contact "ith our original roots& 1hus, a ,ision of radical social change "ill in effect ne,er be satisfied, because in the *rocess one becomes *reoccu*ied "ith transcendence and the reaching of a *arallel, intangible "orld, "ithout e,er actually *aying attention to real0life, real0time interactions among humans and among mortals& t nonetheless ma%es sense that )nger "ould critici4e Confucianism, a su**osedly -inno,ati,e- belief system, for adhering strongly to historical notions of stability and grounded life "ithout confronting the ne" reality& )nger argues that a fundamental fla" of Confucianism is its lac% of incenti,e for u*"ard social mobility7 for )nger, our social strata ser,e as our -secondary- roots in society, and "e must stri,e to get rid of these strata in order to disco,er our true, transcendent sel,es and to engage in true religious re,olution& 1he achie,ement of social mobility, ho"e,er, does not get rid of the strict societal structures already in *lace& f "e *romote social mobility, rather than social e.uality, as a goal, "e "ill sim*ly be able to tra,el freely "ithin our current societal structures, but )nger/s ultimate goal of overcoming and transcending these structures "ould not be reached& 1o go against our natural human tendencies for ritual and relational organi4ation "ould be to ru*ture the grounds on "hich "e "ere founded, and thus to destroy an im*ortant essence of humanity, *er*etuating us to"ard further descent into

groundlessness& 5o" referring directly to )nger/s definition of e+istential groundlessness 0 the notion that "e *lay only a ,ery small *art in a story that "e did not e,en "rite 0 it is clear that Confucianism does not neglect e+istential groundlessness, but rather eradicates it entirely& 3f course "e "rote our o"n story, says Confucius 0 or at least our story "as "ritten by our ancestors, our %in, *eo*le to "hom "e can directly relate& 1he role of Confucianism is sim*ly to ensure the continuation of this story, and thus of the sur,i,al of humanity& !or this reason, Confucianism de,elo*s a strong affinity for ancient Chinese cultures and regimes7 in the eyes of Confucius, "rites Robert $mes, only through channeling and reauthori4ing the -ancient sage %ings- can human stability, and human flourishing, -reach its *ea%&- n the Analects themsel,es, Confucius admits that his a**roach to e+istence is, for the better of humanity, not entirely inno,ati,e: -!ollo"ing the *ro*er "ay, do not forge ne" *aths7 "ith confidence cherish the ancients- '9&1(& Confucianism thus *resents a solid, reality0based foundation not only from "hich "e can launch our ne" li,es, but also "hich is e+*licitly not dis2oint from our true human natures 0 i&e& "e "ere ne,er e+istentially groundless to begin "ith& 3ut of the notion of e+istential groundlessness emerges the ,agueness of indi,iduality and *ersonality, "hich forms the basis of another of )nger/s criticisms of Confucianism& )nger fears that in ha,ing ,ery little say in "riting its story, not only does humanity lose touch "ith its collecti,e *o"er, but each indi,idual human being also loses touch "ith himself& -1o de,elo* oursel,es, "e need the others,- )nger details& -1here is no self0construction outside of inter*ersonal connection& 5e,ertheless, e,ery inter*ersonal connection 2eo*ardi4es us& t threatens us "ith some form of sub2ugation, of loss of *ersonality&- $ccording to Confucius, ho"e,er, intrinsic in the notion that "e can contribute to "riting our o"n stories is the notion

that "e each ha,e autonomy in ho" to "rite it& =ersonality is synonymous not to isolation from society, but rather to authority in one/s conduct, and such self0authority is attainable only -through self0disci*line and obser,ing ritual *ro*riety- '12&1(& Confucianist disci*les are anything but o*inion0less ,oids7 they are as morally autonomous as any other human being, as their moral acts can be traced bac% to, and su**orted by, their o"n reflecti,e deliberation and engagement& Confucianism can then be understood in a more *ositi,e light as a guide for ho" "e should use our o"n autonomy to its o*timal e+tent& 1hus, through Confucianism, indi,iduals *ossess the *o"er not only to strengthen their self0authority, but also to contribute to the "ell0being of humanity& 1he interconnectedness bet"een indi,idual and societal good is best e+em*lified in $nalects >:2?, of "hich there e+ist t"o e.ually ,alid translations: @Virtue does not e+ist in isolation7 there must be neighborsA ;!ingarette<, and @E+cellent *ersons do not d"ell alone7 they are sure to ha,e neighborsA ;$mes<& n Confucian thought, rather than gi,e the indi,idual *rimary im*ortance against the bac%dro* of a se*arate society, the indi,idual should be an e+*ression of the needs of society, and the society "ill in turn reflect the needs and merits of the indi,idual, creating a hybrid force of nature that "e call humanity& 1he indi,idual/s actions carry immense im*ortance, but their greatest re*ercussions arise in their *o"er to assure the sur,i,al of society as a collecti,e force& 1his t"ofold *o"er of the indi,idual in turn -cures- the incurable human fla" of mortality7 by engaging in self0disci*line and acti,e deliberation and engagement, indi,iduals strengthen and e+*and the *otential of their societies to achie,e immortality& )nli%e "hat )nger fears, there is no -finality of 'the( annihilation- of the indi,idual in Confucian terms& 1he death of the indi,idual is incom*arable to the death of humanity, "hich "ill ne,er occur as long as indi,iduals engage in the Holy Rite